Task‐ and self‐related pathways to deep learning: The mediating role of achievement goals,classroom attentiveness,and group participation

Background The expectancy‐value and achievement goal theories are arguably the two most dominant theories of achievement motivation in the contemporary literature. However, very few studies have examined how the constructs derived from both theories are related to deep learning. Moreover, although there is evidence demonstrating the links between achievement goals and deep learning, little research has examined the mediating processes involved. Aims The aims of this research were to: (a) investigate the role of task‐ and self‐related beliefs (task value and self‐efficacy) as well as achievement goals in predicting deep learning in mathematics and (b) examine how classroom attentiveness and group participation mediated the relations between achievement goals and deep learning. Sample The sample comprised 1,476 Grade‐9 students from 39 schools in Singapore. Methods Students' self‐efficacy, task value, achievement goals, classroom attentiveness, group participation, and deep learning in mathematics were assessed by a self‐reported questionnaire administered on‐line. Structural equation modelling was performed to test the hypothesized model linking these variables. Results and conclusions Task value was predictive of task‐related achievement goals whereas self‐efficacy was predictive of task‐approach, performance‐approach, and performance‐avoidance goals. Achievement goals were found to fully mediate the relations between task value and self‐efficacy on the one hand, and classroom attentiveness, group participation, and deep learning on the other. Classroom attentiveness and group participation partially mediated the relations between achievement goal adoption and deep learning. The findings suggest that (a) task‐ and self‐related pathways are two possible routes through which students could be motivated to learn and (b) like task‐approach goals, performance‐approach goals could lead to adaptive processes and outcomes.     

The roles of perceived task interdependence and group members' interdependence in the development of collective efficacy in university student group contexts

Background . Although the relationship between collective efficacy and group performance has been frequently investigated, a few studies have investigated the development of collective efficacy. Aim . This paper proposes some determinants of collective efficacy in small university groups. Group level hypotheses and research questions relating collective efficacy to collective cognition activities, task interdependence, self‐efficacy for group work, and collective orientation were posited. Sample . The sample comprised 145 university students in 40 work‐groups. Method . A two‐phase longitudinal design was employed in the context of university student groups. All groups were required to perform interdependent academic tasks. Aggregated variables were used after testing for within‐group agreement. Results . The results of multiple regression analysis provided some evidence that the more group members perceived themselves to be interdependent in the early stages of group work and assigned their tasks interdependently during group processes, the more likely they were to develop high collective efficacy in the final stages of group work. Collective efficacy was also related to the group average of self‐efficacy for group work especially when task interdependence was perceived to be high. Conclusions . The results suggest that forming groups with capable university students in group work, strengthening university students' perceptions of themselves as interdependent in the early stages of academic group work and assigning interdependent group tasks during group work may contribute to the development of high collective efficacy.     

When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project‐based learning

Background . There has been an ongoing debate about the inconsistent effects of heterogeneous ability grouping on students in small group work such as project‐based learning. Aim . The present research investigated the roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project‐based learning. At the student level, we examined the interaction effect between students' within‐group achievement and group processes on their self‐ and collective efficacy. At the group level, we examined how group heterogeneity was associated with the average self‐ and collective efficacy reported by the groups. Sample . The participants were 1,921 Hong Kong secondary students in 367 project‐based learning groups. Method . Student achievement was determined by school examination marks. Group processes, self‐efficacy and collective efficacy were measured by a student‐report questionnaire. Hierarchical linear modelling was used to analyse the nested data. Results . When individual students in each group were taken as the unit of analysis, results indicated an interaction effect of group processes and students' within‐group achievement on the discrepancy between collective‐ and self‐efficacy. When compared with low achievers, high achievers reported lower collective efficacy than self‐efficacy when group processes were of low quality. However, both low and high achievers reported higher collective efficacy than self‐efficacy when group processes were of high quality. With 367 groups taken as the unit of analysis, the results showed that group heterogeneity, group gender composition and group size were not related to the discrepancy between collective‐ and self‐efficacy reported by the students. Conclusions . Group heterogeneity was not a determinant factor in students' learning efficacy. Instead, the quality of group processes played a pivotal role because both high and low achievers were able to benefit when group processes were of high quality.     

Goal Setting by Groups Performing an Additive Task: A Comparison With Individual Goal Setting1

This article compares goal levels and task performance of groups and individuals that are assigned or self-set goals. Groups performed an additive task that allowed for direct comparison with individuals' i]ndependent performance of the task. Consistent with predictions, groups and individuals selected goals that were less difficult than assigned goals which required only a modest increase in performance. Group members and individuals who were assigned goals attained higher levels of performance than self-set or no goal condition subjects. The prediction that group members and individuals who self-set their goals would have more positive affective reactions to the goal-setting situation than participants in assigned condition was supported. The results of this study are consistent with the existing literature on groups and individuals regarding effects of goals, performance, and affective reactions. Analyses also indicate that the group goal decision process involves a compensatory strategy in which an average of group member preferences for the goal was used to reach a group goal decision. Discussion focuses on the similarities and differences between the findings of self-set and assigned goal-setting situations for groups and individuals, with particular reference to goal choice strategies, goal expectancies, and efficacy.     

Influence of achievement goals and self‐efficacy on students' self‐regulation and performance

It is widely admitted that low self‐efficacy has a detrimental impact on the functioning and performance of a person mainly concerned with performance goals but has no impact when a person is mainly concerned with learning goals (Dweck, 1986 ). However, results from both correlational and experimental studies are divergent. Since these studies examined very few indicators of participants' cognitive functioning, they may have failed to detect those aspects that could be more vulnerable to a negative impact of the combination of performance goals and low self‐efficacy. Another concern is the lack of most studies to clearly distinguish the type of performance goal examined, particularly the performance‐avoidance versus the performance‐approach goal. In the current study, we decided to focus on performance‐approach and learning goals in order to examine how self‐efficacy intervenes in their effects on participants' self‐regulation and performance on a cognitive task. One hundred and forty participants (85 females and 55 males) were examined. They were randomly assigned either to the learning or the performance‐approach goals condition. In each condition, half of the participants received feedback aimed at inducing either high or low self‐efficacy beliefs with regard to the task prior to executing it aloud. Examination of participants' verbal reports, direct observation of some of their behaviours while solving the task, and responses to a retrospective questionnaire allowed the assessment of several indicators of their self‐regulation and performance. As already reported by many studies, self‐efficacy influenced various aspects of participants' self‐regulation and performance. However, contrary to Dweck's hypothesis ( 1986 ), when interaction effects between self‐efficacy and goals were observed, they always involved learning instead of performance‐approach goals. Findings of this study suggest that the nature of the goal might not matter as much as its personal significance or value.     

A mediation analysis of achievement motives,goals, learning strategies,and academic achievement

Background. Previous research is inconclusive regarding antecedents and consequences of achievement goals, and there is a need for more research in order to examine the joint effects of different types of motives and learning strategies as predictors of academic achievement. Aims. To investigate the relationship between achievement motives, achievement goals, learning strategies (deep, surface, and strategic), and academic achievement in a hierarchical model. Sample. Participants were 229 undergraduate students (mean age: 21.2 years) of psychology and economics at the University of Bergen, Norway. Methods. Variables were measured by means of items from the Achievement Motives Scale (AMS), the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students, and an achievement goal scale. Results. Correlation analysis showed that academic achievement (examination grade) was positively correlated with performance‐approach goal, mastery goal, and strategic learning strategies, and negatively correlated with performance‐avoidance goal and surface learning strategy. A path analysis (structural equation model) showed that achievement goals were mediators between achievement motives and learning strategies, and that strategic learning strategies mediated the relationship between achievement goals and academic achievement. Conclusions. This study integrated previous findings from several studies and provided new evidence on the direct and indirect effects of different types of motives and learning strategies as predictors of academic achievement.     

Are we on a learning curve or a treadmill? The benefits of participative group goal setting become apparent as tasks become increasingly challenging over time

A large body of research has pointed to the utility of individual and group goal setting as a performance enhancement strategy. However, group goal setting is more complex than individual goal setting as the group context often strengthens the desire for voice and the possibility of resistance. In line with this idea, we test the prediction that goal‐related performance improvements should be more marked where groups participate in goal setting rather than having goals imposed—particularly as they become increasingly hard to achieve. These ideas are tested in two experiments (N_groups = 27, 72). Both confirm the capacity for group goal setting to enhance brainstorming performance. More importantly, both studies also show that the benefits of participative goals relative to imposed goals becomes more marked as goals become more difficult over time. In line with social identity and self‐categorization principles, we suggest that this is because increases in participatively set goals appear to provide opportunities for collective self‐actualization and self‐enhancement while increases in imposed goals do not. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The trichotomous model and investment in learning to prepare for a sport test: A mediational analysis

Background: Contemporary views on motivation suggest that the approach‐avoidance achievement goals conceptualisation — namely the trichotomous model — can shed light on the important issue of student motivation. Aims: To test the predictive value of the trichotomous model on the investment in learning a sport task for test preparation, and to validate a model which included a set of psychological processes (i.e., state anxiety and competence valuation) which mediate the relationship between the three goals (i.e., performance‐approach, performance‐avoidance, and mastery goals) and test preparation. The study was designed to investigate the direct and mediational effects of three experimental goal conditions on the time in which pupils prepared for a sport test. Sample: French male school pupils (N = 75). Pupils were aged 13‐15 years and attended schools in southern France. Method: Pupils prepared themselves for a sport task with a 5‐minute period of training, and performed in one of three experimental conditions to which they were randomly assigned: a performance goal with a positive outcome focus (performance‐approach), a performance goal with a negative outcome focus (performance‐avoidance), or a mastery goal. Results: Pupils in the performance‐avoidance group reported higher state anxiety and lower competence valuation than those in the performance‐approach and mastery groups, and this psychological state was associated with less time taken to prepare for the test. Conclusion: School pupils placed in an examination preparation context that elicits a performance goal with a negative outcome focus (performance‐avoidance) show motivational deficits which manifest themselves in less time spent practising. The trichotomous model appears to be valid for the study of motivational processes in school physical education.     

Effort in the face of difference: Feeling like a non‐prototypical group member motivates effort

Three studies examined the relationship between individuals' perceived “prototypicality” in a group, their subsequent self‐presentation goals, and individual effort in that group. Consistent with the finding that feelings of marginal ingroup membership status elicit a desire to seek stronger social connections within ingroups, we predicted that non‐prototypical group members will have more salient self‐presentation goals than prototypical members, and as such will exert more individual effort to exhibit the value of their membership to the group. Correlational Study 1 confirmed that non‐prototypical group members may be more likely than prototypical members to volunteer for activities that would benefit their group. Two experimental studies were then conducted to test the causal influence of feelings of prototypicality while also identifying theoretically relevant moderating conditions of perceived task efficacy (Study 2) and public versus private task performance (Study 3). These findings suggest that effortful performance in groups is partly motivated by the desire to foster social ties. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dispositional and situational learning goals and children's self‐regulation

Background. Little research has examined interactions between self‐reported dispositional and experimentally manipulated situational group orientations in their effect on self‐regulation. Aims. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of dispositional and situational learning goal orientation on children's self‐efficacy and engagement and persistence at a puzzle task. Sample. A self‐report learning goal orientation scale was completed by 110 children, aged 9–11 years. Fifty‐three children (24 girls) selected to be high and low on the scale participated in the experiment. Method. Half of the children were given instructions designed to evoke learning goals, while the remainder received performance goal instructions. Children attempted a difficult puzzle task on two occasions, when measures were made of self‐regulatory behaviours. Results and conclusions. Children assigned to the learning goal instruction were more likely to persist at the task until the end of the allotted time, displayed more on‐task behaviour and engaged in more autonomous help‐seeking. These effects were more pronounced following the first task, which all children had been unable to complete. Dispositional task orientation did not predict individual differences on these measures. The findings are interpreted in terms of learned helplessness and self‐worth theory.     

The effect of goal setting on group performance: a meta-analysis

Updating and extending the work of O'Leary-Kelly, Martocchio, and Frink (1994), with this meta-analysis on goal setting and group performance we show that specific difficult goals yield considerably higher group performance compared with nonspecific goals (d = 0.80 ± 0.35, k = 23 effect sizes). Moderately difficult and easy goals were also associated with performance benefits relative to nonspecific goals, but these effects were smaller. The overall effect size for all group goals was d = 0.56 ± 0.19 (k = 49). Unexpectedly, task interdependence, task complexity, and participation did not moderate the effect of group goals. Our inventory of multilevel goals in interdependent groups indicated that the effect of individual goals in groups on group performance was contingent upon the focus of the goal: "Egocentric" individual goals, aimed at maximizing individual performance, yielded a particularly negative group-performance effect (d = -1.75 ± 0.60, k = 6), whereas "groupcentric" goals, aimed at maximizing the individual contribution to the group's performance, showed a positive effect (d = 1.20 ± 1.03, k = 4). These findings demonstrate that group goals have a robust effect on group performance. Individual goals can also promote group performance but should be used with caution in interdependent groups. Future research might explore the role of multilevel goals for group performance in more detail. The striking lack of recent field studies in organizational settings that emerged from our brief review of trends in group goal-setting research should be taken into account when designing future studies in this domain.     

Effectiveness in top management group meetings: The role of goal clarity,focused communication,and learning behavior

Bang, H., Fuglesang, S. L., Ovesen, M. R. & Eilertsen, D. E. (2010). Effectiveness in top management group meetings: The role of goal clarity, focused communication, and learning behavior. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51, 253–261. To explore the relationship between goal clarity, focused communication, learning behavior, and team effectiveness (i.e., task performance, relationship quality, and member satisfaction), self‐report and observer data from eight top management groups that processed 56 agenda items during meetings were analyzed. We found that goal clarity and focused communication was positively related to team effectiveness. The effect of goal clarity on team effectiveness was partially mediated by focused communication. Speaking up when a goal was unclear increased focused communication, task performance and relationship quality. Speaking up when the discussion was off track was not related to task performance and member satisfaction, and was negatively related to relationship quality. These findings have implications for how to conduct an effective management meeting.     

Group and Individual Decision Making for Task Performance Goals: Processes in the Establishment of Goals:in Groups1

The study examines the processes by which goals in groups are established. Performance goals and preferences for goals were stated by individuals acting alone, by groups deciding in unison, and by group members. All subjects performed a card-sorting task as individuals, and self-set goals were selected for expected levels of individual performance. Groups selected goals that were less difficult than individual goals on several occasions of goal setting. Analysis of the group goal decisions suggests that a success-based social comparison process occurs that implies groups select a goal slightly lower than the average of the member preferences so that the group members may appear successful. Analyses also indicated that the lower group goals arose quickly in the group interaction, and that group members readily adopted the lower goals as appropriate levels of performance. Discussion focuses on the observed differences among group, group member, and individual performance goals, and the ability of the success-based social comparison process to account for these differences.     

Multiple goals,motivation and academic learning

Background: The type of academic goals pursued by students is one of the most important variables in motivational research in educational contexts. Although motivational theory and research have emphasised the somewhat exclusive nature of two types of goal orientation (learning goals versus performance goals), some studies (Meece, 1994; Seifert, 1995, 1996) have shown that the two kinds of goals are relatively complementary and that it is possible for students to have multiple goals simultaneously, which guarantees some flexibility to adapt more efficaciously to various contexts and learning situations. Aim: The principal aim of this study is to determine the academic goals pursued by university students and to analyse the differences in several very significant variables related to motivation and academic learning. Sample: Participants were 609 university students (74% women and 26% men) who filled in several questionnaires about the variables under study. Method: We used cluster analysis ('quick cluster analysis' method) to establish the different groups or clusters of individuals as a function of the three types of goals (learning goals, performance goals, and social reinforcement goals). By means of MANOVA, we determined whether the groups or clusters identified were significantly different in the variables that are relevant to motivation and academic learning. Lastly, we performed ANOVA on the variables that revealed significant effects in the previous analysis. Results: Using cluster analysis, three groups of students with different motivational orientations were identified: a group with predominance of performance goals (Group PG: n = 230), a group with predominance of multiple goals (Group MG: n = 238), and a group with predominance of learning goals (Group LG: n = 141). Conclusions: Groups MG and LG attributed their success more to ability, they had higher perceived ability, they took task characteristics into account when planning which strategies to use in the learning process, they showed higher persistence, and used more deep learning strategies than did the students with predominance of performance goals (Group PG). On the other hand, Groups MG and PG took the evaluation criteria more into account when deciding which strategies to use in order to learn, and they attributed their failures more to luck than did Group LG. Students from Group MG attributed their success more to effort than did the other two groups and they attained higher achievement than Group PG. Group LG tended to attribute their failures more to lack of effort than did the other two groups.     

Evidence for the effectiveness of holistic process goals for learning and performance under pressure

ObjectivesResearch has suggested that holistic process goals might help avoid the effects associated with conscious processing of task relevant information by skilled but anxious athletes. This experiment compared the efficacy of holistic and part process goal strategies for novices using a learning paradigm.DesignLaboratory-based experimental design incorporating practice, retention and transfer phases.MethodTwenty-four males were randomly assigned to a part process goal, holistic process goal or control condition and performed a simulated race-driving task in practice, retention and transfer tests.ResultsAnalyses of variance revealed that performance during practice was similar in all conditions but that the holistic process goal group outperformed the part process goal group at both retention and transfer.ConclusionsCompared to part process goals, holistic process goals result in more effective motor learning and performance that appears to be more robust under pressure.     

Collective action control by goals and plans: applying a self-regulation perspective to group performance

In celebration of the 125th anniversary of The American Journal of Psychology, this article discusses a seminal publication by Marjorie Shaw (1932) on small group performance in the rational solution of complex problems. We then propose an approach for the effective regulation of group goal striving based on the collective action control perspective. From this perspective, group performance might be hindered by a collective intention-behavior gap: Groups fail to act on their intentions despite being strongly committed to the collective goal, knowing what the necessary actions are, and being capable of performing them. To reduce this gap, we suggest specific if-then plans (implementation intentions) in which groups specify when, where, and how to act toward their collective goal as an easily applicable self-regulation strategy to automate collective action control. Studies in which implementation intentions improved group performance in hidden profile, escalation of commitment, and cooperation task paradigms are reported and discussed.     

Can I Do It? Will I Try? Personal Efficacy,Assigned Goals,and Performance Norms as Motivators of Individual Performance1

This study tested concurrent influences of personal efficacy, assigned goals, and performance norms on individual performance, mediated by personal goals and task‐specific self‐efficacy. Seventy‐seven undergraduate students performed a verbal task in this laboratory experiment that manipulated assigned goal level (low, high) and information about the performance of others (low, high). Relations among variables, including general, domain, and task‐specific self‐efficacy, as well as performance were examined through structural equation modeling. Results demonstrated simultaneous effects of assigned goals and normative information on self‐efficacy, personal goals, and subsequent performance, as well as mediated effects of domain efficacy on performance.     

Explicit Learning of a Dynamic System with a Non-salient Pattern

We examine the hypothesis that a specific goal leads to implicit learning, whereas a nonspecific goal leads to explicit learning, even though the pattern to be learnt is non-salient. Subjects learned a dynamic control task (Berry & Broadbent, 1984). One group of subjects had a specific control goal, the second group had a non-specific pattern-search goal, and the third group had both goals. On measures of learning (control performance, prediction, and general questions), the non-specific group learnt explicitly, outperforming the other two groups on all learning measures. The specific group performed next best on control performance and prediction questions but performed very poorly on general questions. The dual-goal group performed poorly on all measures. Non-specific subjects predicted well on both familiar and unfamiliar situations. Specific-goal subjects predicted well on familiar situations, regardless of whether their previous response had been correct or incorrect. Dual-goal subjects predicted well only on familiar correct situations. We conclude that the non-specific group learned through explicit hypothesis testing, the specific group learned through a mixture of explicit problem solving and implicit instance learning, and the dual-goal group learned instances. Results are discussed in terms of dual-space models of problem solving and hypothesis testing and in terms of implicit instance learning. We consider how the choice of learning goal affects the cognitive processes used during learning and suggest that having subjects learn the same information implicitly or explicitly is potentially useful for drawing clearer distinctions between implicit and explicit modes of learning.